Do minimally invasive cavity principles really reduce volume loss?


ŞEKER M. , TAĞTEKİN D. , YANIKOĞLU F.

Caries Research, vol.55, pp.406, 2021 (Journal Indexed in SCI)

  • Publication Type: Article / Abstract
  • Volume: 55
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Title of Journal : Caries Research
  • Page Numbers: pp.406

Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study is to compare traditional (TP) and minimally invasive (MIP)

cavity preparations in terms of volume loss. Sixty extracted lower molar teeth with ICDAS

3, 4, and 5 scores were included in the study. The teeth with decay only on the

occlusal surface were selected to provide standardization. In MIP groups, only infected

layers were aimed to be removed. The caries-infected tissues were removed using #14

diamond and #14 ceramic round bur. Fluorescence evaluation was made with

DIAGNOdent Pen (KaVo, Germany) at the point that the ceramic bur does not work

and the number 20 was determined as the threshold. In TP groups, all layers were

removed, but no extension was made for prevention. In these groups, #14 diamond and

#14 steel round bur used for cavity preparation. All samples were scanned with Cerec

Omnicam (Sirona, Germany) before and after preparation and coronal volumes were

calculated in Meshmixer 3.5 (Autodesk). The data were analyzed using the Mann Whitney

U and Spearman's Correlation Test. The level of significance was set at p=0.05. For

ICDAS 3, MIP caused 2.42±0.84% and TP caused 6.72±4.91% volume loss (p=0.001).

For ICDAS 4, MIP caused 8.47±5.52% and TP caused 15.86±7.91% volume loss

(p=0.015). For ICDAS 5, MIP caused 20.15±8.89% and TP caused 25.36±10.93% volume

loss (p=0.226). Consequently, it has been observed that minimally invasive preparation

causes less loss of dental tissues, especially in small and medium sized carious lesions. As

the caries volume increases, the effect of the minimally invasive approach on volume

loss decreases.